Case law

Kim Brown v. Muhlenberg Township

269 F.3d 205 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 11, 2001

269 F.3d 205 (3rd Cir. 2001) KIM BROWN; DAVID BROWN, H/W APPELLANTS v. MUHLENBERG TOWNSHIP; BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF MUHLENBERG TOWNSHIP; MUHLENBERG TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT; ROBERT M. … Property interests created by state law are protected under that amendment, see Board of Regents v.

Brown v. United States

298 F. 428 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Apr 7, 1924

He was asked whether he had read the decision of this court in Wilson v. United States, 190 Fed. 427, 439 , 111 C. C. A. 231, 243 . He said he had. … Press, etc., Co. v. McDonald, 63 Fed. 238 , 11 C. C. A. 155 , 26 L. R. A. 53; Harrison v. United States, 200 Fed. 662 , 119 C. C. A. 78 .

Primerica Life Insurance v. Brown

304 F.3d 469 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Aug 28, 2002

Partnership v. … Brown also argues that arbitration costs render the arbitration clause "substantively unconscionable.” The Supreme Court, in Green Tree Financial Corp. v.

United States v. Harlen Manuel

706 F.2d 908 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Apr 29, 1983

The officers were also shown the two-by-four board that the witnesses said was used to beat Howard over the head. … This case is distinguishable from Brown v. Illinois, 422 U.S. 590 , 95 S.Ct. 2254 , 45 *912 L.Ed.2d 416 (1975) and Dunaway v. New York, 442 U.S. 200 , 99 S.Ct. 2248 , 60 L.Ed.2d 824 (1979).

Doe v. Claiborne County ex rel. Claiborne County Board of Education

103 F.3d 495 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Dec 26, 1996

In Poe v. … Co. v. Browning, 310 U.S. 362, 369 , 60 S.Ct. 968, 972 , 84 L.Ed. 1254 (1940). It must reflect a course of action deliberately chosen from among various alternatives. City of Oklahoma v.

In Re NTP, Inc.

654 F.3d 1279 · Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · Aug 1, 2011

The Board considered the declaration of a forensic document investigator, David Browne, submitted by NTP. Mr. Browne analyzed Telenor for evidence that would suggest the documents may not be authentic. … The Board’s determination regarding Mr. Browne’s af- fidavit is supported by substantial evidence.

In Re Digimarc Corp. Derivative Litigation

549 F.3d 1223 · Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Dec 11, 2008

Benefits Trust v. … Diaz filed this action against eleven current and former board members of Digimarc, seven of whom remain on the board and can fairly be said to control the corporation.

Raymond McGovern v. Christopher Brown

891 F.3d 402 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jun 1, 2018

Code § 22-3302(a)(1); District of Columbia v. Murphy, 631 A.2d 34, 37 (D.C. 1993); see also New York New York, LLC v. NLRB, 313 F.3d 585, 589 (D.C. Cir. 2002). … Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 380 (2007).

In Re Tax Refund Litigation. Barrister Associates

915 F.2d 58 · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Sep 11, 1990

Blackwelder v. Safnauer, 866 F.2d 548, 550 (2d Cir.1989) (citing Deakins v. Monaghan, 484 U.S. 193, 199 , 108 S.Ct. 523, 527-28 , 98 L.Ed.2d 529 (1988); United States v. … Gjertsen v. Board of Election Comm'rs, 751 F.2d 199, 202 (7th Cir.1984); see, e.g., In re Interstate Stores, Inc., 551 F.2d 1332, 1336 (2d Cir.1977); see also 13A C. Wright, A. Miller & E.

Brown v. Wachovia Bank

191 F. App'x 1 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Jul 14, 2006

Patton and Erwin's Lessee v. Brown

18 F. Cas. 1336 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Tennessee · Jul 6, 1812

United States v. Campbell

64 F.3d 967 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Sep 13, 1995

United States v. Jackson, 671 F.2d 216, 219 (5th Cir. 1980). … United States v. Heath, 970 F.2d 1397, 1403 (5th Cir. 1992).

United States v. William Brown

483 F.2d 1314 · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Aug 3, 1973

In United States v. … Maryland v.

United States v. Brown

493 F.2d 485 · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 2, 1974

Brown made no objection to this procedure, hence his challenge must now be rejected unless there is a showing of actual prejudice. Grant v. United States, 5 Cir. 1966, 368 F.2d 658 . … Conklin v. Wainwright, 5 Cir. 1970, 424 F.2d 516, 517-518 , cert. denied, 400 U.S. 965 , 91 S.Ct. 376 , 27 L.Ed. 385 . See also United States v.

United States v. Brown

268 F. App'x 220 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Mar 7, 2008

PER CURIAM: Tony Anthony Brown, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s orders denying Brown’s motions for multiple forms of relief. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. … United States v. Brown, No. 5:98-cr-00037-F (E.D.N.C. Sept. 21, Sept. 26, & Oct. 10, 2007).

Brown v. Advantage Engineering, Inc.

960 F.2d 1013 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 20, 1992

For the district court’s opinion denying Amoco Chemical Company's motion for summary judgment, see Brown v. Advantage Engineering, Inc., 732 F.Supp. 1163 (N.D.Ga.1990). . … Stallworth v. Monsanto Co., 558 F.2d 257, 264-66 (5th Cir.1977).

Brown v. United States

146 F. 975 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 30, 1906

United States v. Rogers, 4 How. 567, 573 , 11 L. Ed. 1105 ; Bates v. Clark, 95 U. S. 204 , 24 L. Ed. 471 ; National Bank v. County of Yankton, 101 U. S. 129, 133 , 25 L. Ed. 1046 ; Ex parte Crow Dog, 109 U. … The case of Hollister v. United States (C. C.

Brown v. Commissioner Social Security Administration

873 F.3d 251 · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Sep 29, 2017

See Monroe v. Colvin, 826 F.3d 176, 189 (4th Cir. 2016) (quoting Clifford v. Apfel, 227 F.3d 863, 872 (7th Cir. 2000)). … See, e.g., Larson v.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Brown

658 F.3d 858 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Oct 13, 2011

SEC v. Brown, 579 F.Supp.2d 1228 (D.Minn.2008). … In July 2009, after further briefing, the court assessed “Tier III” civil penalties of $80,000 against Brown and $400,000 against Jamerica. SEC v. Brown, 643 F.Supp.2d 1088 (D.Minn.2009).

Brown v. United States

265 F. 623 · Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Mar 30, 1920

Johnson v. Gearlds, 234 U. S. 422 , 34 Sup. Ct. 794, 58 L. Ed. 1383 . To prohibit possession of intoxicants is a recognized and judicially approved means of enforcing prohibition laws. Barbour v. State, 249 U. … Johnson v. Gearlds, 234 U. S. 422, 435 , 34 Sup. Ct. 794, 58 L. Ed. 1383 .